Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 20:07:49 +0200 (MET DST)
From: malecki-AT-algonet.se (Robert Malecki)
Subject: Re: State Capitalism and Cuba


Tony writes:
>
>Social programs in general (healthcare, education, etc.) are something that
>serious revolutionaries defend. These types of reforms, such as those that
>exist in Cuba, are good: their existence can aid the working class
>materially. The absence of such social programs and reforms tend to lead to
>demoralization and lack of confidence in the working class as a whole.
>
>In Cuba, as you pointed out, social programs were fought for. This is not
>unlike any capitalist country -- in Canada, for example, what social
>programs (healthcare, education, welfare and unemployment benefits) and
>reforms that the working class has have also been fought for: through large
>strikes and mobilizations. For example, the program of unemployment benefits
>and welfare in Canada come directly from a Communist Party led movement (the
>"On To Ottawa Trek") that organized men in work camps in the 1930's to build
>a mass mobilization to fight for unemployment benefits. 

Obviously Tony can,t see the difference between the reformist work done by 
the CP in Canada for social reforms and the seizure of power by Castro and 
the Nationalisations and mass mobilisations in defense of the defeated and 
ecxpropriated bougeoisie.. Ask just about anybody in Miami Tony? I think 
they no the difference..
>
>As revolutionaries, we defend these reforms which were won through struggle.
>We don't minimize their importance or write them off as strictly
>"economistic" concerns.
>
>However, the existence of reforms and social programs does not indicate
>socialism. As Marxists, we define socialism differently: as workers' power
>over the means of production.

No it does not..Even if the above is correct, its not the point. Are you 
some kind of magician or something Tony. Poof socialism=workers power. Isn,t 
there a road on the way to this stuff we are talking about. Or has nothing 
actually happened in the last 100 years or so..
>
>>Louis: Cuba is moving toward capitalism, not socialism. The "NEP"-like
>>reforms are undermining socialist property relations and Cuba's future is
>>very much in doubt.
>
>I sense, Louis, that this is a dodge of the question. Please explain what
>socialist property relations existed in Cuba... that is: did workers have
>*control* of the means of production? I argue that there is a fundamental
>difference between *nationalized* property relations and *socialist*
>property relations.

The difference between Nationalised property relations and socialist or 
communist property relations is the struggle from the old to the new. 
Actually i,m beginning to wonder if the state caps on this list and 
especially Tony have a "gradualist" attitude to history and class 
struggle..It appears that there is no room for the human or class factor of 
wars and revolutions in the imperialist epoch and all that this means...

Warm regards
malecki in exile...




     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---